Security for costs—claimant resident outside the jurisdiction condition (CPR 25.27(b)(i))

Published by a ³ÉÈËÓ°Òô Dispute Resolution expert
Practice notes

Security for costs—claimant resident outside the jurisdiction condition (CPR 25.27(b)(i))

Published by a ³ÉÈËÓ°Òô Dispute Resolution expert

Practice notes
imgtext

This Practice Note considers the condition under CPR 25.27(b)(i) as to whether security for costs will be ordered on the basis that the claimant is resident outside the jurisdiction ie England and Wales. This rule has undergone changes to both the numbering and text. For insight, see: Changes to CPR 25.

For information on the other conditions under CPR 25.27(b), see Practice Note: Security for costs—requirements and conditions (CPR 25.27).

The rationale for this condition is that enforcement of an order may be more difficult or costly when enforcing in certain jurisdictions, as explained by the Court of Appeal in Nasser v United Bank of Kuwait:

‘46…The rationale of the discretion to order security on that ground is that enforcement of an order for security for costs abroad may be more difficult or costly than elsewhere: cf Sir Jeffery Bowman's 1997 Review, paragraphs 33–37...’

Summary of the court’s approach

The Court of Appeal provided summarised the relevant principles in Danilina v Chernukhin (2018), as follows:

‘(1) For jurisdiction under CPR

Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom

Popular documents